In the UK, young women now get paid more than men. For those who were following the trends, this comes as no surprise at all:
Article: Subscribe to read
1 Like
Good. Frankly, they are usually smarter than we.
The real story is how little pay has kept up with inflation. I earned that as a newly graduated lab monkey 20 years ago, and I also had enough to buy my first flat in London
Maybe that is why the title of the graph reads âreal incomeâ âŚ
So, in the Excited Kingdom, women without a degree have overtaken men without a degree. But, from the graphs, that appears to be more because men are losing more than women are gaining. Iâm pleased by the later but perplexed by the former. That canât be good for society.
1 Like
Part of the explanation lies in the methodology. Median incomes were calculated using the full population as opposed to only those in employment. In other words, Income includes wages, benefits / social security and any other sources of personal revenue. Which means that whichever group had a higher employment rate will naturally have a higher income. This is neither right or wrong, its just an important bit to remember. I would have loved to see an apples to apples comparison, i.e. a sample of fully employed men vs. women and their breakdown by income and educational level.
In any case, things seem to be moving in the right direction.
1 Like
That was my first thought too (minus the âExcited Kingdomâ - itâs funny but slightly derogatory).
In the end no-one should overtake anyone, all you can aim at is equal pay for equal work.
Excited -derogatory? No
Kingdom - derogatory - definitely
1 Like
Thatâs always a red herring though. Even in a team with people who have the same job description, every team manager knows that certain people are better than others. In my first managerial job, I managed a team of analysts and although they had broadly the same salaries (few % points difference), the skill levels were way different than a few % points. Pay should be linked to skills, attitude and potential, not to sex or âsame workâ.
2 Likes
Isnât that what performance-related bonuses are for?
As an aside, now the meaning of gender has been re-written, I canât suggest that the word gender would be more appropriate than the word âsexâ in your post as it could also mean pay was linked to sleeping with the boss!
2 Likes
Attitude and potential can go up and down e.g performance starts slipping as someone goes through a messy and distracting divorce or develops a gambling addiction, and once their pay has been increased it cannot be cut.
As Tom1234 said, performance related bonuses are a more equitable way to address this.
- Pay can be cut. Many multinationals have unwritten rules that this shouldnât be done, but it can and it is done.
- Pay = salary + bonus.
- Performance slips due to extraordinary circumstances are addressed by the bonus part in the hope that there will be a regression to the mean post the extraordinary circumstances.
Yep, by equal work I meant not only the same position within a company, but also âequalâ - more or less - performance, productivity etc. Which is quite the opposite in some/many places because gender (or other, or âcrossâ discrimination) discrimination is still alive and well.
So the âright directionâ is not about someone (i.e. women) having to âovertakeâ someone else, but about creating less barriers towards achieving a fair remuneration for all.
Weâre probably saying the same thing, minus me mentioning managerial positions. 
Btw, I remember an episode with my OH who tried to re-negotiate his salary many years ago in a multinational. The manager was a woman who told him something along the line of "I probably shouldnât tell you that, but your salary is consistently higher than mine, and we made an âeffortâ to bring you here). Anyway, he could afford to be picky and changed that job. That woman was a very OK and competent manager, but an employee should also feel like theyâre earning what they deserve or could earn somewhere else.
1 Like
Haha, OK, Iâll bite: the term should have been âexcitableâ then⌠
So why are Men without a degree doing so badly?
'cause theyâre not women:)
Because they are not articulate
But a ÂŁ10k reduction in mean wages over just 20 years?
Because they are lazy, I left school at 16 & was earning over ÂŁ50,000 when I was 21 in 1983. I had my own business & was working 7 days a week, average UK house price at the time was around ÂŁ24,000. The CHF v ÂŁ rate was 3.2 so in CHF I was earning more in 1983 than 30 years later.
1 Like
Quite Interestingly, in my experience people almost never know what they âshouldâ be earning. More often than not, particularly in corporate Switzerland, employees believe theyâre worth far more than their market value truly is. In reality, oneâs true value is apparent only once one is on the job market. Still looking for a job after 2 weeks? You were overvalued. Got a 20% raise? You were undervalued. Itâs as simple as evaluating stock performance.